I watched all the currently made Harry Potter films first (4). I was impatient to find out how it all ends so I read the entire series from the beginning. It was a nice refresher of the plot and subplots. I have now read all 5 books and am quite interested to see how they decide to pull off the last book. I thought they did an adequate job transferring the book into a film. Granted, a lot of little "extras" can only be found in the books.
Because I had seen the films already, I knew quite well how the different characters walked and talked. When I read the books I was able to "hear" the characters speaking their lines as the film played on in my mind. It was neat to read the scenes that were cut from the film. Like getting a bonus track on the DVD only in book form. It is an easier read for me to already have the character created than to have to come up with my own visualization based on what was written. There are details in an image of a character that books simply cannot supply. The opposite is true about the details a book can give about a character's mental state/thoughts that a film cannot.
At times it can be a bit distracting though. I spent too much time comparing my memory of the film with the book I was reading. I would make mental notes where the film or story deviated from one another. Sometimes I was pleasantly surprised while others I was bummed that one or the other was not the "real" presentation.
Not too long ago I went to the theater to watch "Percy Jackson and the Olympians, Book 1: The Lightning Thief". Visually it was a lot of fun. The story moved along well. Sometimes I thought they rushed it a bit but over all opinion was positive.
Well, now I'm reading the book:
I am only about 1/4 of the way into the book but it almost feels like a completely different story. I am even more excited to read the book. I realize that despite the fact that I have seen the film, I have no clue how the story is supposed to go. While Harry Potter's screenwriter (Steve Kloves) did a great job working with JK Rowling to get the movie to be quite close to the books I feel that Craig Titley (the screenwriter for the Percy Jackson film) did it all on his own without consulting the author. He has a rather short filmography and I believe he simply lacks the experience to take a big action novel and turn it into a true to the book movie. I'm bummed that I saw the movie first.
Do you have a preference when there is a book and a film out and you have neither read the book nor seen the film? Which gets your attention first?
2 comments:
If I don't read the book before seeing the movie, I probably won't read the book. I kinda feel like watching the movie is a spoiler for the book. However, the opposite is not necessarily true. I enjoy watching the movie after reading the book to see how they handled the story. This is probably why I have yet to read the original Star Wars trilogy books. I kinda already know how it ends.
Now that I'm 2 books beyond the first one in the series... I have come to the conclusion that the movie cut out all the set-up for the rest of the series. The screen writer made it a stand-alone film and not a series. BUMMER....
The only person from the film that I have used in my head to visualize while reading is Pierce Brosnan as Chiron. Everyone else from the film is either all wrong or too old (for book 1).
Post a Comment